iron．snow．ball

Netflix queue 正好輪到一些費里尼的作品，最近的一部是 想當年(Amarcord,1973)，第一次看 Amarcord 大約一半時間都昏昏欲睡，所以又看了一遍，這一次我選了有影評的版本，聽聽專家講什麼或許可以比較清醒。

影評是由維克森林大學的Peter Brunette教授和加拿大安大略省皇后學院的 Frank Burke教授主講。其中講到一段「費里尼與電影學院派的關係」很精彩，想和大家分享。以下是聽寫的結果，有一些聽不清楚的地方用 (?) 表示，(???) 越多表示越不確定。

Who made the commentary:
- Peter Brunette of Wake Forest
- Frank Burke of Queen's College, Ontario (author of the book "Fellini's Films").

Fellini's relationship with academia

<1:52:20 commentator A>
大意是說：費里尼和柏格曼、安東尼奧、黑澤明及Bunuel（安達魯西亞之犬的導演）等人的電影成了電影變成學院裡討論的主題，並進一促成了電影研究這個學門的創立。費里尼在這個時期被視為大師。

In term of Fellini's reputation among film scholars, now we have over the past 30 years developed a quite large base of film scholarships and many of the mechanisms have existed in the study of literature for instances or in the history in the past. It is interesting in considering his relationship with academia to see that in the 1960s he was kind of the star along with Bergmann, Antonioni, Kurosawa and Bunuel. These were the figures who to a large extend allow films into the academy, allow films to be taught in english departments for instance. Within North America, most film programs were actually evolved out of English departments. It was a way of saying what we've got our Shakespear of the 20th century. We've got our joyce of 1950s and 1960s of whatever we have this genius Itallian film director and certainly his work deserves the treatment along with Dun-T xxxx(?????). So at a particular moment, at the height of film movement, when many of film instructors were basically literal instructors who are [brain stars in the breath of film] (???), Fellini was considered as one of the two or three major directors in the world.

<1:53:26 commentator A continues>
大意是說：1968年五月的巴黎學潮引發的政治性的檢討，也導致了電影學院泛政治化的價值取向，著重個人奇想與符號拼貼的費里尼電影在當時因為不符合社會主流價值而不被學院派重視。

Interestingly, now following the failure of May 1968 (註：1968五月的巴黎學潮), the kind of re-evaluation we talked about goes on at Italian films goes on at academia as well. And it becomes a serious questioning about how revolutions always fail and how capitalism omninously(?) seems to be extending itself and absorbing everything into it so there is no possibility of significant transformation. And how ideologies, sort of social myth that drive us, work to prevent changes from taking place. And along with that, this was obvious a major politicisation of the study of film, and Fellini began to be perceived as a high mordernized artist who is doing things just for his own ratification and his interview didn't really help in this matter because he tended to talk about the similarities between the film director and god both working through life to create newness and wonders for the world. So within academia, Fellini fell very much out of the favor. Literally, professors gave away to this new film academic who are trained in a different way in European forms of criticism and demanded a certain kind of deliberate(?) politicalness to the nature of art.

<1:54:40 commentator A continues>
大意是說：此時討論費里尼的只有義大利文化研究的科系（註：費里尼是義大利導演，其電影也都在義大利取材拍攝）。由此可知費里尼與學界的關係是十分複雜的，在最近十年之前他都是被忽略的。

One place where Fellini survived was in the studies of Italian culture within Italian departments in North America where he was still being considered in the same context during the same way that Dun-T(??) would be considered. So he's had a very complicated career with academia and until the last ten year or so he's really been ignored.

<1:55:16 commentator B>
大意是說：費里尼是政治正確的犧牲者。現在，我們已經不再被這種意識型態左右而能回頭去看這些被忽略的導演，他們真正想要表達的也許比我們原先以為的更複 雜。例如費里尼的「過份明顯的蒙太奇」其實他是因為質疑這種蒙太奇的表現法而故意在他的電影裡使用的。現在大家又重新對費里尼感興趣了，因為我們已經越過了會因為別人沒有明白大聲地說我們希望他說出的東西就直接否定他的時期了。

I think the reason for it is that Fellini has been a victim of political correctness, and I think what happens now is the political correctness movement, which I think is a misnorm or sometimes used by right-wing people to silence people who have never had a voice before, but nevertheless, I think Fellini was a victim of that. And now we are at a place it seems to me where we can begin to go back to people and see maybe they are doing something more complicated than we thought they were doing. So it turns out that Fellini so-call very obvious montaging is really on the surface and he is depicting the kind of montaging that he is openly questioning. He is raising lots of issues about it. That's why people are getting re-interested in Fellini because we've gone through that kind of automatic nidgery(?) or rejection of anything that doesn't say exactly what we want them to say in very you know(?) literal, immediately obvious terms to see some of the complicities that worked.

<1:56:05 commentator A>
大意是說：我同意你的說法，我希望我們對Amarcord的導讀能讓聽眾了解費里尼並不是一個靠著膚淺的衝動和潛意識執導的導演，相反地，他一直在質疑如何透過電影表現自然 ，他在做什麼，以及他為什麼要這樣做。

I think that is a very good point and I hope our commentary on Amarcord will reveal that he is not just this kind of maverick guy inventing out of the superficial impulses or his sub-conscious, but instead, he is constantly questioning the nature representation and what he is doing and why he is doing it.

想分享的主因，是這一句 話很感動我：

We've gone through that kind of automatic rejection of anything that doesn't say exactly what we want them to say in immediately obvious terms.

願台灣社會更進步更多元，我們有一天也可以豪氣地這樣說。


註1：在網路上並沒有找到類似這個影評描述的資料，有可能是網路上並沒有古早時期的資料，也可能是實情並沒有這麼泛政治化，是費里尼後期電影風格太過後現代的關係。不過這些都是我的猜測，請知道的朋友補充。

註2：Amarcord 很好看，第一次那樣是剛吃完晚餐飽來呆的關係啦。

延伸閱讀

- 法国学潮:正视政治争端的"理性分歧"（這篇文章寫的真好。）

- 法國 1968 五月學運與當時社會及思想的關係 (高二學生的報告，讚喲！）

- 永遠現代 影像奇詭絢麗 回顧意大利電影大師費德里柯．費里尼經典電影

- 一些費里尼的電影（星星是我喜歡的程度)
          大路(La Strada, 1950)  ****
          甜蜜生活(La Dolce Vita, 1960)  ***
          八又二分之一(8 1/2, 1963)  **** <-- 費里尼最有名的作品
          想當年 (Amarcord, 1973) *****
          And the Ship Sails On (1983) ***1/2 <-- 這部不那麼有名，結局也有點鳥，但是看完酸酸的又很溫暖，大概就像影評人Stanley kauffmann說的  "During his lifetime, many fine filmmakers blessed us with their art, but he was the only one who made us feel that each of his films, whatever its merits, was a present from a friend."